Development and Validation of a Wearable Device to Provide Rich Somatosensory Feedback for Rehabilitation After Sensorimotor Impairment

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mirka Buist ◽  
Enzo Mastinu ◽  
Max Ortiz-Catalan
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Application ◽  
Haptic Feedback ◽  
Wearable Device ◽  
Body Parts ◽  
Tactile Sensitivity ◽  
Tactile Discrimination ◽  
Somatosensory Stimulation ◽  
Sensory Discrimination ◽  
Sensorimotor Impairment ◽  
Development And Validation

Abstract BACKGROUNDThis study describes the development and validation of a non-invasive wearable device to provide haptic feedback and train sensory discrimination. The ultimate aim of this device is to be used as part of a treatment for functional and/or pain rehabilitation due to sensorimotor impairment.METHODSThe development was guided by a structured design control process to ensure the verifiability and validity of the design outcomes. Two sub-systems were designed to systematically provide various types of somatosensory stimulation: 1) a tactile display for touch and vibration, and 2) a set of bands for sliding, pressure, and strain sensations. The device was designed with a versatile structure that allows for its application on different body parts. We designed an interactive computer program to command the device and enable training sessions. The validation of the device was performed with 11 able-bodied individuals whose upper arm tactile sensitivity was measured over 5 training sessions conducted daily. Tactile discrimination and perception threshold were measured using the standard 2-point discrimination and Semmes-Weinstein monofilament tests, respectively.RESULTSThe development and verification procedures ensured that the device successfully complied with the pre-established requirements, which were selected to enable the device clinical application. The results on tactile discrimination and sensitivity showed high subject-dependent variability but trended towards improvement (p=0.05). This trend was also confirmed by the scores achieved during the training sessions.CONCLUSIONSWe introduced a wearable device to deliver somatosensory stimulation and to train sensory discrimination. The design is versatile enough to allow for its application on different body parts. The device was found robust enough for clinical application, and it showed to increase tactile sensitivity on upper arms of able-bodied individuals. Further studies will be conducted to determine if our current findings transfer to individuals with sensorimotor impairment and if this approach is suitable for functional and/or pain rehabilitation after sensorimotor impairments.

scholarly journals Noninformative Vision of Body Movements can Enhance Tactile Discrimination

i-Perception ◽  
2022 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 204166952110592
Author(s):  
Yosuke Suzuishi ◽  
Souta Hidaka
Keyword(s):  
Visual Information ◽  
Dynamic Condition ◽  
Discrimination Performance ◽  
Static Condition ◽  
The Body ◽  
Enhancement Effect ◽  
Body Parts ◽  
Body Movements ◽  
Tactile Discrimination ◽  
Noninformative Vision

Vision of the body without task cues enhances tactile discrimination performance. This effect has been investigated only with static visual information, although our body usually moves, and dynamic visual and bodily information provides ownership (SoO) and agency (SoA) sensations to body parts. We investigated whether vision of body movements could enhance tactile discrimination performance. Participants observed white dots without any textural information showing lateral hand movements (dynamic condition) or static hands (static condition). For participants experiencing the dynamic condition first, it induced a lower tactile discrimination threshold, as well as a stronger SoO and SoA, compared to the static condition. For participants observing the static condition first, the magnitudes of the enhancement effect in the dynamic condition were positively correlated between the tactile discrimination and SoO/SoA. The enhancement of the dynamic visual information was not observed when the hand shape was not maintained in the scrambled white dot images. Our results suggest that dynamic visual information without task cues can enhance tactile discrimination performance by feeling SoO and SoA only when it maintains bodily information.

scholarly journals Grasping Embodiment: Haptic Feedback for Artificial Limbs

2021 ◽  
Vol 15 ◽  
Author(s):  
Charles H. Moore ◽  
Sierra F. Corbin ◽  
Riley Mayr ◽  
Kevin Shockley ◽  
Paula L. Silva ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Visual Feedback ◽  
Daily Living ◽  
Haptic Feedback ◽  
Sense Of Self ◽  
The Body ◽  
Artificial Limbs ◽  
Body Parts ◽  
Vibrotactile Feedback ◽  
Feedback Type ◽  
Upper Limb Prostheses

Upper-limb prostheses are subject to high rates of abandonment. Prosthesis abandonment is related to a reduced sense of embodiment, the sense of self-location, agency, and ownership that humans feel in relation to their bodies and body parts. If a prosthesis does not evoke a sense of embodiment, users are less likely to view them as useful and integrated with their bodies. Currently, visual feedback is the only option for most prosthesis users to account for their augmented activities. However, for activities of daily living, such as grasping actions, haptic feedback is critically important and may improve sense of embodiment. Therefore, we are investigating how converting natural haptic feedback from the prosthetic fingertips into vibrotactile feedback administered to another location on the body may allow participants to experience haptic feedback and if and how this experience affects embodiment. While we found no differences between our experimental manipulations of feedback type, we found evidence that embodiment was not negatively impacted when switching from natural feedback to proximal vibrotactile feedback. Proximal vibrotactile feedback should be further studied and considered when designing prostheses.

scholarly journals Ownership of an artificial limb induced by electrical brain stimulation

2016 ◽  
Vol 114 (1) ◽  
pp. 166-171 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kelly L. Collins ◽  
Arvid Guterstam ◽  
Jeneva Cronin ◽  
Jared D. Olson ◽  
H. Henrik Ehrsson ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Electrical Stimulation ◽  
Brain Stimulation ◽  
Human Subjects ◽  
Body Part ◽  
Multisensory Perception ◽  
Body Parts ◽  
Electrical Brain Stimulation ◽  
Artificial Limb ◽  
Somatosensory Stimulation ◽  
The Brain

Replacing the function of a missing or paralyzed limb with a prosthetic device that acts and feels like one’s own limb is a major goal in applied neuroscience. Recent studies in nonhuman primates have shown that motor control and sensory feedback can be achieved by connecting sensors in a robotic arm to electrodes implanted in the brain. However, it remains unknown whether electrical brain stimulation can be used to create a sense of ownership of an artificial limb. In this study on two human subjects, we show that ownership of an artificial hand can be induced via the electrical stimulation of the hand section of the somatosensory (SI) cortex in synchrony with touches applied to a rubber hand. Importantly, the illusion was not elicited when the electrical stimulation was delivered asynchronously or to a portion of the SI cortex representing a body part other than the hand, suggesting that multisensory integration according to basic spatial and temporal congruence rules is the underlying mechanism of the illusion. These findings show that the brain is capable of integrating “natural” visual input and direct cortical-somatosensory stimulation to create the multisensory perception that an artificial limb belongs to one’s own body. Thus, they serve as a proof of concept that electrical brain stimulation can be used to “bypass” the peripheral nervous system to induce multisensory illusions and ownership of artificial body parts, which has important implications for patients who lack peripheral sensory input due to spinal cord or nerve lesions.

The primate subthalamic nucleus. I. Functional properties in intact animals

1994 ◽  
Vol 72 (2) ◽  
pp. 494-506 ◽  
Author(s):  
T. Wichmann ◽  
H. Bergman ◽  
M. R. DeLong
Keyword(s):  
Basal Ganglia ◽  
Subthalamic Nucleus ◽  
Current Model ◽  
Body Parts ◽  
Movement Onset ◽  
Joint Rotation ◽  
Somatosensory Stimulation ◽  
Train Duration ◽  
Key Aspects ◽  
Passive Movements

1. The present study tests several key aspects of the current model of the intrinsic circuitry of the basal ganglia, in particular the degree to which basal ganglia-thalamocortical circuits are functionally segregated at the level of the subthalamic nucleus (STN). To this end the responses of STN cells to somatosensory examination (n = 301 cells), the polarity and latencies of neuronal responses to passive and active movements (n = 223 cells), responses to microstimulation (n = 1589 sites), and cross-correlation functions of pairs of neighboring neurons (n = 72 pairs) were studied in STNs of three African green monkeys. 2. The activity of 55% of cells examined in STN was briskly modulated in response to passive movements of individual contralateral body parts. Of these, 86% responded to passive joint rotation of muscle palpation, but in some cases (25% of responding cells) responses were also elicited by light touch. In 91% of the responding cells responses were elicited by manipulations around a single joint only. 3. The caudoventral sector in STN was largely devoid of cells with responses to somatosensory stimulation. Within the rostrodorsal zone a lateral region containing neurons that responded to arm movements and a more medial region with neurons responding to leg movement were found. Cells responding to orofacial movements were located more dorsally and rostrally. Neurons with similar responses to active and passive movements of the limbs tended to be clustered within “arm” and “leg” zones. 4. Of identified arm cells in STN (n = 80), 36% responded to the application of torque pulses to the elbow (43 responses overall). Forty-eight percent of these cells responded to both extension and flexion torques. Ninety-three percent of the responses were initial increases in discharge, which characteristically occurred earlier and were shorter than initial decreases. Fifty-three percent of the responses were biphasic or multiphasic. 5. During active step tracking movements 40% of STN arm cells (n = 53 cells) responded with significant changes in activity. Thirty-six percent of these cells showed responses with both extension and flexion movements. Of the responses, 90% were increases in discharge. Only 14% of all responses were biphasic or multiphasic. Responses tended to occur around the time of movement onset (average latency 2 ms after movement onset). 6. Microstimulation (bipolar pulses, 40 microA, 200–500 ms train duration, 400 Hz) of the core of STN itself did not appear to produce movement.4+ synchronized activity in only 11% of pairs.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)

scholarly journals The ‘creatures’ of the human cortical somatosensory system

2020 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Noam Saadon-Grosman ◽  
Yonatan Loewenstein ◽  
Shahar Arzy
Keyword(s):  
Somatosensory Cortex ◽  
Somatosensory System ◽  
Brain Regions ◽  
Human Cognition ◽  
Whole Body ◽  
Functional Specialization ◽  
Body Parts ◽  
Somatosensory Processing ◽  
Somatosensory Stimulation ◽  
Cortical Parcellation

Abstract Penfield’s description of the ‘homunculus’, a ‘grotesque creature’ with large lips and hands and small trunk and legs depicting the representation of body-parts within the primary somatosensory cortex (S1), is one of the most prominent contributions to the neurosciences. Since then, numerous studies have identified additional body-parts representations outside of S1. Nevertheless, it has been implicitly assumed that S1’s homunculus is representative of the entire somatosensory cortex. Therefore, the distribution of body-parts representations in other brain regions, the property that gave Penfield’s homunculus its famous ‘grotesque’ appearance, has been overlooked. We used whole-body somatosensory stimulation, functional MRI and a new cortical parcellation to quantify the organization of the cortical somatosensory representation. Our analysis showed first, an extensive somatosensory response over the cortex; and second, that the proportional representation of body parts differs substantially between major neuroanatomical regions and from S1, with, for instance, much larger trunk representation at higher brain regions, potentially in relation to the regions’ functional specialization. These results extend Penfield’s initial findings to the higher level of somatosensory processing and suggest a major role for somatosensation in human cognition.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document